Comments on: New Review of Unscientific America in Science Communicationhttp://blogs.discovermagazine.com/intersection/2010/03/25/new-review-of-unscientific-america-in-science-communication/
Tue, 27 Sep 2011 17:28:30 +0000hourly1https://wordpress.org/?v=4.4.5By: ponderingfoolhttp://blogs.discovermagazine.com/intersection/2010/03/25/new-review-of-unscientific-america-in-science-communication/#comment-42596
Thu, 25 Mar 2010 18:33:06 +0000http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/intersection/?p=7528#comment-42596“[B]ecause it’s the scientists who best understand science, and have the biggest stake in its continued respect (and funding), they carry the primary responsibility for bridging the gaps….scientists are going to have to answer the phone and explain why their work matters. They need to adopt common language and not let honkers like “neuropharmacology” and “biobehavioral” escape the lab.”

Tenebaum seems to focus on scientists who are at research institutions. Plenty of wonderful scientists at liberal arts colleges, industry, non-profits, etc. that probably could speak to the big picture, why not call them instead of calling professor at a research institute/university? Many wonderful scientists choose not to be faculty at research universities. They already have different reward systems that might garner a better response.

Most scientists don’t become faculty at research universities. Journalists should appreciate that and take advantage of what is available. For example if something came up about quantum and a journalist needed someone to connect it to the bigger picture maybe they should call Chad Orzel at Union College.